MEMORANDUM ORDER

MILTON I. SHADUR, Senior District Judge.

This Court's daily review of ECF filings in cases that are, or have previously been, assigned to this Court's calendar has just turned up another hand-printed filing by Marvin Sumlin ("Sumlin") — his Motion for Leave To Proceed In Forma Pauperis ("Motion"), received in the Clerk's Office on March 3. Despite this Court's earlier memorandum orders (the most recent of which was issued on February 22, 2016), Sumlin does not seem to realize that the pendency of his current appeal1 means that this Court no longer has jurisdiction over his case. Instead any such motion should be filed in the Court of Appeals (when that is done, the Court of Appeals normally remands the issue to the District Court for a ruling in the first instance).

What is even more puzzling is that just such an order was issued by our Court of Appeals on February 19, 2016 (Dkt. No. 22) in response to Sumlin's motion for leave to appeal in forma pauperis that had been filed the same day — and, indeed, this Court promptly issued its February 22 memorandum order that denied Sumlin's in forma pauperis status and advised him that he must refile such a motion in the Court of Appeals pursuant to Fed. R. App. 24. Under the circumstances it seems likely that Sumlin may have intended his current filing to comply with the just-described advice in the February 22 memorandum order, but that he simply failed to caption his current Motion for filing in the Court of Appeals rather than this District Court.2 This Court is accordingly transmitting this memorandum order and an attached copy of Sumlin's Motion to the Court of Appeals for its consideration.

ATTACHMENT

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS

I, Marvin Sumlin, Petitioner in the above entitles case, comes before this court and respecting moves. That he be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis, without being requires to prepay fees or cots, because he is presently incarcerated at stateville correctional center and without assets with to pay the costs of these proceeding.

Wherefore, petitioner prays that he be granted leave to appeal in forma pauperis.

Trial judge abused its discretion by not allowing my witness to testify for me at trial, which is clearly allowed by the rape shield statue 725 ILCS 1/115-8(a)

AFFIDAVIT

I, Marvin Sumlin being first duly sworn under oath depose and sate that the foregoing is true and correct and made upon my personal knowledge and I am competent to testify thereto.

I Swear or affirm under penalty of perjury that, Because of my poverty I cannot prepay the docket fees of my appeal or post a bond for them. I because I am entitles to redress. I swear or affirm under penalty of prejury under united states laws that my answers on this form are true and correct. (28 U.S.C. § 1746; 18 U.S.C. § 1621.) _____________________________________________________________